Jump to content

Maxmimum time for instand/limited timing mode?


Ulb

Recommended Posts

Using the instant/limited timing mode (timing mode 0) with long durations seems to convert them to absolute duration.

What is the maximum duration that timing mode can 'hold'?

Edited by Ulb
Link to comment

All non-instant/permanent durations are converted to absolute duration.  Timing modes 0 and 3 get converted from seconds to ticks (x15), then added to current game time (in ticks).  Timing mode 10 is already in ticks, so it's just added to current game time (ticks).  Using timing mode 0, 3 or 10, it depends on how much game time has already passed - the farther along you are the lower the value it can hold without terminating instantly.

2^32 - 1 is the max value it can hold, and that value is in ticks, 1/15 second.  Game time is stored in seconds, and resets at (2^32 / 15) back to 0, because apparently time is cyclical.

If you just want an effect to last indefinitely without using the permanent timing modes (because of necessity):
Timing Mode 4096, duration = -1.

Link to comment
On 3/9/2019 at 9:40 PM, kjeron said:

2^32 - 1 is the max value it can hold, and that value is in ticks, 1/15 second.  Game time is stored in seconds, and resets at (2^32 / 15) back to 0, because apparently time is cyclical.

2

Just because you measure something to be between zero and something else, doesn't mean it's cyclical.. what that means is that your measure is cyclical. The difference is that you can't take back time. Also all the units used in time are cyclical... as what happens after the second and minute count becomes greater than 59 ? Same with bit difference in hours, days, months, years, decades, centuries and millenniums etc.

Even more fun is in, if you look into the big bang theory, and look at the start of the universe ... there the time is measured in seconds... trouble is there is no seconds by the current definition, as by it, a second is been defined as exactly:

"the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom" (at a temperature of 0 K).

Thing is, there's no way you can have caesium-133 at the start of the universe, as it has not been ... you know, materialized, let alone be at 0 Kelvin.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...